Jharkhand High Court awards damages under ‘Future Prospect’ head for death of 33-year-old housewife in motorcycle accident

While increasing the compensation awarded to the family of a 33-year-old woman who died on the spot in a road accident, the Jharkhand High Court observed that future prospects should be taken into account while assessing her contribution to the household.

Change in the compensation awarded by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal from Rs. 3,84,000 to Rs. 5,69,600, the court observed that it would be appropriate to add 40% of the income as a future prospect while assessing the compensation amount.

Referring to statements on the aspect of awarding compensation for future prospects Justice Subhash Chand in its order observed, “From the evidence available on record, the deceased was a 33 year old lady and the learned Tribunal held that she was a domestic worker as such fictitious income was estimated at Rs.3,000/- per month. The contested decision shows that the Tribunal did not award anything for the future prospects of the deceased…The deceased, who was 33 years old on the date of the accident, was therefore a domestic worker. Taking into account the services she would provide to the family members, even if for the sake of argument she did not earn, it would be appropriate to add the 40% of income as a future prospect when assessing the compensation amount.

The court ThuS partially allowed, a miscellaneous appeal was filed with the relatives of the deceased woman challenging the award granted by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Hazaribagh.

The case arose out of a road accident in which the deceased, a 33-year-old housewife, was killed on the spot when a bus collided with the jeep she was driving. The plaintiffs, her family members, had filed a petition in the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal seeking damages alleging that the deceased was earning ₹10,000-₹11,000 per month from a provision shop. The Tribunal, citing lack of documentary evidence, rejected the claim of business income and estimated her fictitious income at ₹3,000 per month.

The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision to fix the notional income at ₹3,000 per month, stating: “Admittedly, no evidence was adduced on behalf of the plaintiffs regarding the running of the stock store by the deceased. No permit has been issued by a local government. No invoice has been produced on behalf of the plaintiffs in respect of the purchase of the goods from the wholesalers for the purpose of resale at the retail price in the grocery store.”

With regard to the extent of damages, the Court considered the following: “whereas the same was assessed on the basis of annual income of the deceased of Rs.36,000/- per annum and 1/3rd of the income was deducted for his personal expenses which the deceased may have incurred, thus Rs.24,000/- became the annual income assessed and the multiplier of 16 was applied by the learned Tribunal and Rs.3,84,000/- was assessed as the amount of compensation. In addition, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded under the conventional head for loss of estate and Rs.1,00,000/- for love and affection and Rs.25,000/- awarded for funeral expenses, as such the total compensation was was awarded Rs.6,09,000/-.”

The Court noted that the notional income of the deceased, a 33-year-old housewife, was estimated at ₹3,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal did not take future prospects into account in its ruling.

In increasing the compensation, the Court clarified that the increased amount for future prospects would be subject to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the settlement of the matter on July 1, 2013 until the date of award, and 9% per annum from the date of award until actual payment.

Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Appeal was allowed in part, varying the compensation from ₹3,84,000/- to ₹5,69,600/-, with the specified interest terms on the increased amount.

Case Title: Tapeshwar Prasad and Ors versus Akashyabat Ray and Ors

LL citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 175

Click here to read the verdict